why not say we are racist and then explain what racist truly means rather than abiding by the twisted subversion of the word that pc societies lie has created.
To me part of being white and proud is no longer curtailing to the lies other kinds have created.

I'd say because average White people don't care enough to listen. And first impressions last. I wouldn't call it "abiding" rather, understanding that's the way most folks see it. I would go the other direction to what you're saying and suggest using those words would be playing into the enemies hands. They want people to think we are racist because they know exactly what average people believe "racist" to be. You can see the fire in anti's eyes the moment we say 'we are racialists, not racists'.

The initial point of this thread was that you didn't like Nationalists being afraid of being labeled racist. Being called Racist doesn't worry me in the slightest, Nor would it most Nationalists.

I myself don't use that word to explain my views. Nor do I say I'm a hater, or a bigot even though those words don't worry me either.

I'm a racialist, and I recent the presence of Non-Whites in my nation. Doesn't that sound much more pleasant than

racalism is just a alternate spelling of racism just as nigga is just a alternate spelling of ******

With semantics it's really easy to define broad, commonly used terms to one's liking. As you pointed out, it's sort of similar to how the "progressives"( left wing extremists) have redefined the term racism so that only Whites - and all Whites - can be accused of it. Cuz you know, we be havin' da power.

The power to have illegal immigrants educated in your public institutions with your tax dollars assisting in this all the way....gotta love that "power" and "white privilege".

__________________

People who think that they know everything are really annoying to those of us who actually do.- some drunk guy at Barney's Billiards

Anti-Racists have this new elite fighting style where they slam their face against your fist to bruise your knuckles.- Whitey McWhite(Valhalla)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holy Roman Emperor

During the Renaissance learned astronomers who said that the earth orbited the sun were intimidated into silence - we too live in such an age where belief is more important than scientific inquiry. Hopefully, in years to come, people like Dr. James Watson and perhaps even leaders of the WN movement will be seen as the Galileos of our time.

Unfortunately, until that time comes, if it ever does, we'll have to endure the ridicule of ignorant indoctrinated people who think that they're smart because they parrot what they are taught.

I always see posts by white nationalists declaring they are not racist and showing a great fear of being described as a racist why is that?

It seems to me that like the aversion to the n word this is another case of disliking a term or name simply because of how antis and non whites view the term.

But anyone who discriminates on racial grounds is a racist why should white nationalists fear or avoid being termed as such just because liberals and non whites with their usual dumb misrepresentations of how things are and what things mean have subverted the word into meaning race hater or genocidial maniac? as people who have broken free from pc idiots and their false definitions of things isn't it time we broke free from worrying about terms and names just because pc multi racalists have defined them as bad?

true definition of racist as opposed to how idiot antis define it.
racĚism (rszm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability .2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

I proudly wear the title "Racist", but maybe it's because for some SF'ers the first definition fits very well, but the second one does not because they aren't doing anything to discriminate against anyone whether they are Non-White or not. Most White People on here look at themselves as the victims of the Government and the Race Traitors who'd like us to mix and the Non-Whites who leech and prey upon us, not as the evil perpetrators.

The second definition doesn't fit me very well either, but I know what most people mean and whenever and wherever I had the chance I'd be more than willing to discriminate against people that weren't White in that I'd separate the White Race from the Non-Whites in the US. I guess that would be a form of discrimination as they'd be forced to go somewhere else and they wouldn't have us to leech off of anymore (which in their eyes would be worse than anything).

I'd say because average White people don't care enough to listen. And first impressions last. I wouldn't call it "abiding" rather, understanding that's the way most folks see it. I would go the other direction to what you're saying and suggest using those words would be playing into the enemies hands. They want people to think we are racist because they know exactly what average people believe "racist" to be. You can see the fire in anti's eyes the moment we say 'we are racialists, not racists'.

The initial point of this thread was that you didn't like Nationalists being afraid of being labeled racist. Being called Racist doesn't worry me in the slightest, Nor would it most Nationalists.

I myself don't use that word to explain my views. Nor do I say I'm a hater, or a bigot even though those words don't worry me either.

I'm a racialist, and I recent the presence of Non-Whites in my nation. Doesn't that sound much more pleasant than

I'm a racist, I want all ******s gone. ?.

your example yes it sonds somewhat more plesent its going to depend on who your trying to appeal to.
Some may have gotten to the point that they are already tired of being polite and stronger words and terms may appeal to them.
though thats a whole other topic.
its just annoying to to me seeing white nationalists become so concerned about terms because thay might be disturbing to those who are opposed or lack conviction to the cause.

Though I acknowledge the validity of your concerns from your pov.
still even if you say I am racalist not racist don't you think you will end up having to explain the percieved difference to most people ?
so why not say yes I am racist but not in the way pc society defines the word?

With semantics it's really easy to define broad, commonly used terms to one's liking. As you pointed out, it's sort of similar to how the "progressives"( left wing extremists) have redefined the term racism so that only Whites - and all Whites - can be accused of it. Cuz you know, we be havin' da power.

The power to have illegal immigrants educated in your public institutions with your tax dollars assisting in this all the way....gotta love that "power" and "white privilege".

yes thats a strange one isn't it whites are supposed to have all the racist power and yet its always whites that are having to curtail to the sensitivties of non whites and white culture and values that are always giving ground to non white ones.

Still even if you say I am racialist not racist don't you think you will end up having to explain the perceived difference to most people ?

Maybe, in most cases yes. But at least it will give a chance to explain rather than envoking the Immediate trigger response instilled into most peoples subconscious from 30 or how ever many years of Jewish P.C Indoctrination that the word Racist is one to steer clear of, or instantaneously relating it to unintelligent haphazard rhetoric or "hate-crimes".

Quote:

so why not say yes I am racist but not in the way pc society defines the word?

Well that could be the next step, if the person as an intellectual or concerned White person is still interested in the Initial topic of conversation. Unfortunately most don't seem to care, or do but don't want to do anything about it.

Quote:

Though I acknowledge the validity of your concerns from your pov

Thank you, I also see your point of view and I personally sway back and fourth on the issue, which method is more effected, I wish I new the answer.

Maybe, in most cases yes. But at least it will give a chance to explain rather than envoking the Immediate trigger response instilled into most peoples subconscious from 30 or how ever many years of Jewish P.C Indoctrination that the word Racist is one to steer clear of, or instantaneously relating it to unintelligent haphazard rhetoric or "hate-crimes".

Well that could be the next step, if the person as an intellectual or concerned White person is still interested in the Initial topic of conversation. Unfortunately most don't seem to care, or do but don't want to do anything about it.

Thank you, I also see your point of view and I personally sway back and fourth on the issue, which method is more effected, I wish I new the answer.

well still not sure were the real difference is in the sense that arguments about if your racist or racalist are likely to come from someone calling you racist so it would seem just as efficient to say yes but not in the way you mean it .
Than say no I a racalist not a racist have the other party say "what the heck thats the same thing"
either way to get them to comprehend it your going to have to explain how your views differ from their preconcieved notions.

Guess I just find it irksome that on a white nationalist forum so many people are as quick to react against being called racist as any pc liberal would be.
Still guess everyone has their own approaches and priorities when it comes to these issues and I can respect yours wether I agree with them or not .

off topic but is Australia a heavily multi racial nation nowadays? always thought it was still pretty unaffected by multi racalism at least compared to the US and UK.

And I always remember an interview with Aussie pop singer Jason Donovan where when he was asked why Australia was so much less crime ridden than the US and UK he said "because Australia is not as multi racial as the US and UK"
So it seemed as though even Aussie trendies were not that infected with pc thinking and pro multi racalism.
Have things changed a lot there?